COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 67573 ST. COLMAN & AFFILIATED : FEDERAL CREDIT UNION : : Plaintiff-Appellee : : JOURNAL ENTRY -vs- : AND : OPINION WILLIAM BAMBECK : : Defendant-Appellant : : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: JULY 22, 1995 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: CIVIL CASE FROM THE CLEVELAND MUNICIPAL COURT CASE NO. 87-CVF-26776 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee: CHARLES G. PONA (#0037901) WELTMAN, WEINBERG & REIS CO., L.P.A. LAKESIDE PLACE 323 LAKESIDE AVENUE, WEST CLEVELAND, OH 44113 For Defendant-Appellant: WILLIAM BAMBECK, PRO SE 5711 BRADLEY AVENUE PARMA, OHIO 44129-2209 - 2 - 2 SPELLACY, J.: Defendant-appellant William Bambeck ("appellant") appeals the decision of the trial court attaching funds from appellant's bank account. Appellant assigns the following errors for review: I. REFEREE PARIS, IN HER REPORT ON WHICH THE FINAL RULING IN THIS CASE IS BASED, DISREGARDED THE SAME COURT'S PREVIOUS RULING ON MY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. THIS IGNORED THE COURT'S DETERMINATION ON ISSUES CRUCIAL TO MY CASE, AND TO SMALL BUSINESSES IN GENERAL. II. REFEREE KING USED INCOME FROM THE MONTH AFTER THE FILING (NOVEMBER) INSTEAD OF THE MONTH BEFORE (OCTOBER 10 TO NOVEMBER 8), IN HER REPORT (PAGE 1 PARAGRAPH 5+). III. THE CLEVELAND MUNICIPAL COURT, INCLUDING THE CLERK'S OFFICE, IS CONDUCTED IN A WAY THAT FAVORS CREDITORS WITH QUICK ACTION IN THEIR FAVOR, BUT BURDENS DEBTORS WITH LONG DELAYS AND BURDENSOME REHEARINGS AND RED TAPE. IV. THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN ENFORCING A JUDGMENT OF WHICH I WAS NEVER NOTIFIED, DENYING ME DUE PROCESS. (CLEVELAND MUNICIPAL COURT JOURNAL, PAGE 1, PARAGRAPHS 1-4. Finding none of the assignments of error to have merit, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. I. On August 27, 1987, plaintiff-appellee St. Colman & Affiliates Federal Credit Union ("St. Colman") filed a complaint for money only against appellant to collect on a past due installment loan. Judgment was rendered in St. Colman's favor for $897.04 plus costs. On November 9, 1993, St. Colman filed a notice of garnishment of property other than personal earnings in Cleveland Municipal Court. - 3 - 3 $1,154.02 was withdrawn from appellant's bank account. After an exemption hearing was held before a referee, the attachment was sustained in part. $252.44 was paid to St. Colman with the balance returned to appellant. The judgment entry was not appealed. On April 13, 1994, St. Colman filed a second attachment. Appellant failed to appear for the hearing. The attachment was sustained and $949.49 was attached from appellant's bank account. On May 20, 1994, appellant filed a motion for reconsideration. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on July 14, 1994. Appellant appealed from a referee's report which recommended sustaining the second garnishment of $949.49. After the notice of appeal was filed, the trial court treated appellant's motion for reconsideration as objections to the referee's report and sustained the objections. A hearing on the attachment was set for July 28, 1994. The referee recommended that seventy-five percent of the attachment be exempted. The remaining twenty-five percent of $237.37 was attached and ordered released to St. Colman. The trial court confirmed the referee's report. Appellant's notice of appeal states he is appealing from the referee's report. This is not a final appealable order. Appellant filed a motion for dismissal of the appeal with this court which was denied. Appellant's notice of appeal will be treated as a premature notice of appeal and the case will be decided on its merits. See App.R. 4(C). - 4 - 4 II. In his first assignment of error, appellant objects to various findings made by the referee. Most of appellant's argument focuses on the judgment entry confirming the last referee's report from which this appeal was taken. A few of appellant's points of contention relate to the first garnishment. Because appellant did not appeal the ruling on the first garnishment, those arguments will not be addressed. Appellant did not file written objections to the referee's report with the trial court. Civ.R. 53(E)(6) states in pertinent part: On appeal, a party may not assign as error the court's adoption of a referee's finding of fact unless an objection to that finding is contained in that party's written objections to the referee's report. By failing to object to the referee's report, appellant has waived any error which may have existed. See Proctor v. Proctor (1988), 48 Ohio App.3d 55. Appellant's first assignment of error is overruled. III. Appellant's second and fourth assignments of error refer to matters which took place in the first garnishment proceeding. Appellant did not appeal from that judgment. His arguments are not part of the instant appeal and are not now before this court. Appellant's second and fourth assignments of error are meritless. - 5 - 5 IV. In his third assignment of error, appellant contends the Cleveland Municipal Court unfairly favors creditors over debtors. Appellant did not present this argument below. Any issue not brought to the attention of the trial court is waived. Security Ins. Co. v. Regional Transit Auth. (1982), 4 Ohio App.3d 24. Appellant's third assignment of error is overruled. Judgment affirmed. - 6 - 6 It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed. The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the Cleveland Municipal Court to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. JOHN T. PATTON, C.J. and DIANE KARPINSKI, J., CONCUR. LEO M. SPELLACY JUDGE N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announcement of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof this document will be stamped to indicate journalization, at which time .